Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Robert Swinney on May 28, 2014 at 1:45pm

Tell me  how you keep the airspeed at 110 going straight down, even with the power off? Something I missed in my over 50 yrs. of flying....Parachute?

Permalink Reply by Troy Hartman on May 28, 2014 at 2:00pm

Yes, a specifically engineered drogue. You can see the line coming off of the C182 in the first photo.

Permalink Reply by Michael Heit on May 28, 2014 at 1:11pm

It has already been pointed out: 

§91.319   Aircraft having experimental certificates: Operating limitations.

(a) No person may operate an aircraft that has an experimental certificate—

(1) For other than the purpose for which the certificate was issued; or

(2) Carrying persons or property for compensation or hire.

Amateur built experimental aircraft cannot be used for hire in this particular case of activity. I suppose a pilot/owner of such aircraft could donate their aircraft & time for the stunt; but their insurance coverage [if any] would most likely be canceled. The operating limitations for the particular aircrat used would have to either allow such activity [aerobatic use or parachuting out side emergency use] or be amended for such activity. In any case no compensation for the use of the aircraft can be made. However I suppose one could offer to sell the stunt person a pencil for sale? 

I am certain the FAA would frown upon this activity using an amateur bilt aircraft, and as a DAR I would not risk my certificate to amend the operating limitations unless I was first given authority [blessings] by the FAA FSDO managing office.

Permalink Reply by Paul D Young on May 28, 2014 at 1:41pm

The discussion herein using the "law" as a defense against doing this seems to have been settled with the FSDO advising the stunt skydivers  "to go this route" i.e. experimental aircraft use, to avoid the need for FAA approval.  Nevertheless, that does seem contrary to the wording in the regs.

Permalink Reply by Michael Heit on May 28, 2014 at 1:58pm

I did not intend to specifically state that this could not be done "under the law" ... just that it cannot be done for compensation or hire ... and not with out written approval from the managing FSDO office in writing before any amendment of the operating limitations for the specific aircraft involved in the activity. 

Permalink Reply by John Clark on May 28, 2014 at 2:03pm

This is a good time to discuss something I am not clear on. The way I understand 91.319 is that a pilot may not carry persons or property for hire. So what happens when the airplane itself is rented by a company, and you provide yourself as a pilot for free? This is done all the time, isn't it? I hope so, how else am I going to get time in a completed Zenith before flying mine?

Permalink Reply by Danal Estes on May 28, 2014 at 2:26pm

John,

Totally separate from the stunt thread:

The reg says "Compensation or Hire".  You cannot rent an experimental airplane.  To illustrate:  When you pick up a Factory Built Light-Sport-Aircraft, you have a choice of registering it E-LSA or S-LSA.  If registered "E", it can NEVER be used for rental, lease, flight instruction, etc, etc. 

This choice is almost invisible to Fixed Wing pilots; it is so strongly assumed that the purchaser will want S-LSA that the factory rarely points out this choice.  In the world of Powered Parachutes, it is much more common to be offered the choice... and a fair number of people choose "E", because it is almost unheard of for a PPC to be rented... and there are maintenance advantages on an "E"... and so forth.  

Anyway, no experimental (Exp Amateur Built, Exp LSA, Exp Exhibition...) can be operated for Compensation or Hire. So, if you want time in a similar type to what you are building, you must:

1) Find someone who will dual that aircraft for free (or at most, 50% of direct operating expenses).  You can pay a CFI, if they provide the plane for free. 

By the way, if a CFI charges $x per hour in a student-provided airplane and $2x per hour in their homebuilt... and the FAA finds out... they will prosecute, and have a 100% success rate (so far) in administrative court.  

2) Find a physically identical aircraft that is registered with an Airworthiness cert that allows hire.  For example, there is a Zenith CH-750 at Carson City, Nevada, that is registered S-LSA, and is available for rental with a CFI. 

Permalink Reply by John Clark on May 28, 2014 at 2:37pm

Thank you Danal, for clearing that up.

Permalink Reply by Dejan Vucinic on May 28, 2014 at 2:44pm

Wow! We seem to be suffering a serious outbreak of NIMBY here!

I find it the apex of hypocrisy that a community which routinely puts life and

limb of little children at risk (YE anyone?) by flying them in tin cans powered

by discarded car engines redesigned by rank amateurs with no engineering

knowledge and no meaningful oversight would bark raving mad at

professional stuntmen for inspiring the masses to join our endangered

sport. Shame on you Joe and Bill.

Troy and Joe: my (helpful?) suggestion would be to work tightly with the

Heintz family, especially to clear the possible loads with the designer.

While the 701 may look like a Cessna, you'll find that the empty weight

is half for a similar envelope, so everything is much flimsier. These

planes are ultralights and require TLC even without undue stresses.

For instance, the tail is attached (and pivots!) by a few 3/16" bolts

running through 1/8" aluminum, so a human body impacting near the tip

will shear it right off. The 701's Vne is dangerously close to how slow

you can fly; abruptly hanging ~20% of max gross weight in a random spot

on the airframe already stretched near its limits may be a no-go.

The 601 HDS could be a better match as it's good to +-6G at 135 knots,

but it's low-wing and you couldn't enter the cabin unless the canopy was

modded like so: http://www.zenithair.com/zodiac/6-photo3.html

Many of the low-wings are also equipped with BRS units which would

add an extra out for the pilot in case of mishap.

Many posters already pointed out the illegality of using an experimental

for hire in the US, so whatever compensation scheme you come up with

make sure it's cleared in writing by the FAA beforehand lest the wrath of

the community smite thee post facto.

Permalink Reply by Joe Scheibinger on May 28, 2014 at 3:08pm

I'm sure every one of the members of the Heintz family and all the engineers at Jabiru and Rotax will appreciate you calling them and their planes "tin cans powered by discarded car engines redesigned by rank amateurs with no engineering knowledge and no meaningful oversight." In your efforts to be sarcastic you just hurt a lot of people. You should remove that paragraph.

Permalink Reply by Dejan Vucinic on May 28, 2014 at 3:23pm

Joe,

After re-reading that paragraph I don't see how it could be interpreted to

mean that the designers of Zenith or Rotax products are rank amateurs.

Chris Heintz is a decorated aeronautical engineer with a degree from a

world-renowned university who learned his ropes at a very successful

airplane factory before starting his own business.

I'm sure the folks at Rotax have equally impressive credentials and a

long track record, yet even their two-stroke engines are known for their

poor reliability.

The problem is, neither Chris nor Rotax built our airplanes.  In my neck

of the woods it is perfectly legal (and insured!) to fly Young Eagles behind

a Subaru engine pulled out of a junkyard, on an airframe modified without

consulting the designer. Compared to this legal insanity, jumping into a

flying airplane is the proverbial walk in the woods.

Permalink Reply by Troy Hartman on May 28, 2014 at 3:42pm

Your post was spot on Dejan. I am an aeronautical engineer myself, but I guess a reckless one. Good thing that can't be revoked.

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• 3
• 4
• Next ›
• Page